Now imagine how good they'd have been if more of their "A"-listers had participated. Albert Pujols, Jose Bautistia, Adrian Beltre, David Ortiz...

I love the WBC, and I can't wait for the 2017 tournament already. However, I really wish they could find a way to schedule it so more of the best MLB players would participate. I dunno, maybe make like the NHL during Olympic years and suspend the season for two weeks around what would normally be the All-Star break and use this in place of the All-Star Game?

Warning: More-or-less stream-of-thought ideas follow...

They already start spring training a couple weeks early in WBC years. Instead of running the WBC during that expanded ST time, they could start the regular season two weeks earlier (yes, I know that messes with some "Traditional" Opening Day stuff, but whatever). If you make it a mid-season tournament, you eliminate the problem some people have with batters being so far ahead of the pitchers in the spring.

E.G., if something like that had been in place for this season, Spring Training would still have started early, with the first batches of pitchers and catchers reporting on February 11. The very first regular season game of the season would be moved up two weeks (i.e., the Rangers/Astros game originally scheduled for Sunday, March 31 would instead be played on Sunday, March 17), the "WBC Break" would begin on Monday, July 1st (instead of the All-Star Break starting on Monday, July 15th, and play would resume as usual on Friday, July 19th. If you didn't want to take quite that long, you could regain at least 1 day by eliminating the final "seeding" game for each of the two pools at the end of round 2 (which doesn't affect which teams move on anyway) or take out the semifinal games and use the games at the end the 2nd-round pools as elimination games instead.

Now you've got more players in mid-season form (instead of just those who had been playing in winter leagues), which means "better" baseball. How many of the players not participating said they weren't because they wouldn't be ready by the time the tournament started? (At least for the Rays, both Longoria and Price skipped out for those kinds of reasons.)

You've got facilities with staffs that are already in the swing of things, too (at Marlins Park it felt like a lot of the staff was hired earlier in the week and didn't quite have the hang of everything yet; just getting a refill on my drink during or picking up a souvenir after the game was slooooow). Now instead of one stadium hosting a single All-Star game, you've got several stadiums hosting WBC games, and the erstwhile ASG host with the championship game. Mid-season means more people are already paying attention (there are lots of people that don't even start thinking about baseball until well into the season) and an international platform to promote the playoff races.

The hardest part would probably be convincing the other "big" regular season leagues (NPB in particular, and KBO generally) to do likewise. But imagine the possibilities there, too. I know Japan's team didn't have their biggest names participating for many of the same reasons that many of MLB's biggest names didn't; I've read several things indicating that Korea's team was in a similar situation. You'd also need the cooperation of MiLB (at least of the full-season leagues in there, Single-A through Triple-A) and the MLBPA. I think it could work, though. Selig's already expanded the powers of the Commissioner's Office already; might as well use those powers for something good on occasion, amirite?

Among the few downsides I can see would be for those countries participating that have few high-level professional players of their own and few MiLB/MLB players that could qualify to play for them. They'd be at an even bigger disadvantage than before here. I'm thinking South Africa and New Zealand in particular, but most of the teams that went through the new qualifier rounds this time around would probably be affected.

Good news for the Rangers is that there are reports that they have agreed to a 8 year deal with Shortstop Elvis Andrus. Conventional wisdom was that as a Scott Boras client, when his contract was up in 2014 he would be going to the Yankees to replace Jeter.

Great signing for the Rangers. Now that Andrus is set at Short for the next 8 years, they have to decide what to do with top prospect Profar. He's in the minors now but is expected to either move to Second, which would for Ian Kinsler to move positions, or be traded.

It's possible that they'd get one of them to move to the outfield or play third. With Beltre at third, it's more likely they'd put one these guys in the outfield.

Either way, I hope they bring Profar up soon. I used the last pick in my fantasy draft to get him.

There are a lot of moving pieces, but some may depends on if Cruz is ssuspended for a supposed connection to the Miami PED clinic. I don't think that any move will be made with Profar soon, unless something happens with Cruz.

They gain another year of his initial rookie contract if they hold him in the minors for a few more months.

IF/when they call Profar up, and barring injury, I suspect that Kinsler moves to 1B. I think Kinsler only moves to the OF this year if Cruz is suspended. If not, I think the Rangers may let Cruz go at the end of the year and Kinsler may move to RF next year.

They gain another year of his initial rookie contract if they hold him in the minors for a few more months.

That right there is something that MLB and the MLBPA needs to work on. From the player perspective, guys that get held back even for a few months have reduced career earnings - potentially significantly based on what I read about it last year or so.

From the fan perspective, if you're holding back on the best product because of contract stuff, I'd like a few bucks off my tickets if I'm not getting the discount version of your team.

They gain another year of his initial rookie contract if they hold him in the minors for a few more months.

That right there is something that MLB and the MLBPA needs to work on. From the player perspective, guys that get held back even for a few months have reduced career earnings - potentially significantly based on what I read about it last year or so.

From the fan perspective, if you're holding back on the best product because of contract stuff, I'd like a few bucks off my tickets if I'm not getting the discount version of your team.

True, but I think from the Rangers side the contract isn't a primary concern. Profar is better off in the Minors playing every day than up in the majors today anyway. It just happens to also work out contract wise for them.

IF a rookie player is going to end up playing every day, and the club has a need, most will ignore the extra month. See Boston's Jackie Bradley Jr.

I think the idea behind it is giving team the ability to call up minor leaguers at the end of a season for a few weeks without giving them full major contracts.

I remember another shortstop that signed a long-term, high-dollar deal with the Rangers...

There a pretty significant difference in paying 24 year old Andrus 8-years at $120 Million and A-Rod for a 10-years at $252 million.

Andrus is among the top young shortstops in the league.

When Rodriguez signed his first humongo-deal with Texas, he was 25, considered to be the best shortstop in the league (the best player period, actually), and he was gone after 3 seasons.

Obviously the circumstances are different, and the comparisons aren't perfect. Still, I think it's important to note how many long-term/high-dollar contracts are inked, and how many of those actually complete both with the original team and with the player remaining relatively healthy and active for the duration.

I love that the Rays have Evan Longoria under contract for potentially as far out as 2023, but I'm not holding my breath that the contract will play out its entire course that easily.

When Rodriguez signed his first humongo-deal with Texas, he was 25, considered to be the best shortstop in the league (the best player period, actually), and he was gone after 3 seasons.

In hindsight, that contract doesn't look that terrible. From 2001-2007 he won 3 MVPs, missed no significant time, and was a legitimately great player. From 2008-2010, he started to break down and miss some games but the Yankees did win the 2009 Word Series (with Rodriguez as playoff MVP) and his OPS was still respectable in 2008 and 2009. For a 10-year deal, 9 solid seasons is pretty good return.

Is MLB.TV or MLB At Bat worth the subscription fee? Was wondering about having afternoon baseball radio streaming at work as background noise, plus listening to more of the Cubs.

I love MLBtv, but I think it really depends on what team[s] you follow and how often you'd watch games. I root for a couple of non-local teams, so I can typically find a game of interest when I get home from work (even if it's just background noise) and probably have baseball on three to six times a week. Gameday audio is just a nice bonus for me, I'll occasionally listen to a day game while sitting at my desk at work.

From your tribus, it looks like you're in Minnesota? (I'm not a big hockey guy so this could be way off.) If that's the case, be aware that you won't be able to watch any Twins games live (though you can still get streaming audio) due to blackout rules. I only bring it up because I can't tell if you follow the Cubs specifically or if you just mentioned them because of the frequent day games at Wrigley. I don't follow the Rockies too closely, so the online blackouts aren't a huge downside for me... but if I were a bigger fan I'd consider that a major flaw in the MLBtv model.

Why does MLB insist on having games in cities that we know will be cold in early April? I know it ruins the whole opening day feel, but have the teams from these cities play a couple series on the road - that week or so will probably significantly impact the weather.

Is MLB.TV or MLB At Bat worth the subscription fee? Was wondering about having afternoon baseball radio streaming at work as background noise, plus listening to more of the Cubs.

I love MLBtv, but I think it really depends on what team[s] you follow and how often you'd watch games. I root for a couple of non-local teams, so I can typically find a game of interest when I get home from work (even if it's just background noise) and probably have baseball on three to six times a week. Gameday audio is just a nice bonus for me, I'll occasionally listen to a day game while sitting at my desk at work.

From your tribus, it looks like you're in Minnesota? (I'm not a big hockey guy so this could be way off.) If that's the case, be aware that you won't be able to watch any Twins games live (though you can still get streaming audio) due to blackout rules. I only bring it up because I can't tell if you follow the Cubs specifically or if you just mentioned them because of the frequent day games at Wrigley. I don't follow the Rockies too closely, so the online blackouts aren't a huge downside for me... but if I were a bigger fan I'd consider that a major flaw in the MLBtv model.

Yup, Minnesota. Lived in Chicago for a few years, occasionally follow the Cubs. Between them and the Twins, have both day games and awful seasons covered . Considering I don't have a cable package that lets me watch many Twins games live anyway, the MLBtv option was interesting, but having audio access suits my purposes better, and I enjoy going around trying to catch interesting radio broadcasters more anyway.

Why does MLB insist on having games in cities that we know will be cold in early April? I know it ruins the whole opening day feel, but have the teams from these cities play a couple series on the road - that week or so will probably significantly impact the weather.